ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2019
Race/Ethnicity and Accuracy of Self-Reported Female First-Degree Family History of Breast and Other Cancers in the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age-specific breast and ovarian cancer risks associated with germlineThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Family history of breast cancer, mammographic breast density and breast cancer risk: Findings from a cohort study of Korean women.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2022Article
- First- and second-degree family history of ovarian and breast cancer in relation to risk of invasive ovarian cancer in African American and white women.International journal of cancer · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have evaluated accuracy of self-reported family history of breast and other cancers in racial/ethnic minorities.
methodsWe assessed the accuracy of cancer family history reports by women with breast cancer (probands) from the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry compared with 2 reference standards: personal cancer history reports by female first-degree relatives and California Cancer Registry records.
resultsProbands reported breast cancer in first-degree relatives with high accuracy, but accuracy was lower for other cancers. Sensitivity (percentage correctly identifying relatives with cancer) was 93% [95% confidence interval (CI), 89.5-95.4] when compared with the relatives' self-report of breast cancer as the reference standard and varied little by proband race/ethnicity and other demographic factors, except for marginally lower sensitivity for Hispanic white probands (87.3%; 95% CI, 78.0-93.1;
conclusionsNon-Hispanic white, African American, and Asian American probands reported first-degree breast cancer family history with high accuracy, although sensitivity was lower for Hispanic white probands and those with low English language proficiency. IMPACT: Self-reported family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives is highly accurate and can be used as a reliable standard when other validation methods are not available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.